• REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

    At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Donald Trump

Len Madeiros said:
Well, if the EU did have supremacy over the UK - in law, as you state - you'll perhaps explain to me, how the UK engaged in a civil war until 1997, and how it went to war in The Falklands, Afghanistan and Iraq, without the explicit say so of the EU. But I'm sure you have further evidence to share that a "federal superstate" is being created, and you can provide examples of its potential reach.

We always were a sovereign state. You'll note that we didn't go out on a limb, once we found our "liberation" - we didn't bring back feet and inches, for instance. And we are still following EU regs just to trade with them, hence the huge rollover of EU law into UK legislation, pre-2021. Do you still feel enslaved by a foreign power, now that you can't remove a plastic top off a bottle?
Click to expand...
EU the increased the areas of supremacy it had over the UK law and has other member states with each subesequent treaty, it has control re some areas but not others.

These are the new areas of qmv between the nice and lisbon treaty

1741082997368.png
We rolled over EU law into UK legislation for ease of transition and cos others hope to push the UK back in, but as time goes on those laws can be updated/deleted as the UK sees fit and doesn't have to seek permission from europe.

If some of your laws have be set within the bounds of the laws set by the EU in those areas then you are not a sovereign state, if you can't see that then that's your 'problem' or you're just being disingenuous.

But it's immaterial cos we're not in the EU because thankfully the euro quislings lost and that is the bit that truly matters.
 
pawras said:
EU the increased the areas of supremacy it had over the UK law and has other member states with each subesequent treaty, it has control re some areas but not others.

These are the new areas of qmv between the nice and lisbon treaty

View attachment 23961
We rolled over EU law into UK legislation for ease of transition and cos others hope to push the UK back in, but as time goes on those laws can be updated/deleted as the UK sees fit and doesn't have to seek permission from europe.

If some of your laws have be set within the bounds of the laws set by the EU in those areas then you are not a sovereign state, if you can't see that then that's your 'problem' or you're just being disingenuous.

But it's immaterial cos we're not in the EU because thankfully the euro quislings lost and that is the bit that truly matters.
Click to expand...
Enjoy your victory over us quislings, even if you have totally misunderstood the factual argument. But the vote was never about facts - all about people's instinct and a dislike of immigration. Even that list you have shared still means nothing in terms of fighting wars and setting our own domestic policies, or even how we choose to vote. Any "dictats" on the Single Market are full of opt-outs and derogations anyway, and mainly regulate trading and FoM.

We are where we are, however, and I am relatively unaffected, even if a trifle peeved.
 
Len Madeiros said:
Enjoy your victory over us quislings, even if you have totally misunderstood the factual argument. But the vote was never about facts - all about people's instinct and a dislike of immigration. Even that list you have shared still means nothing in terms of fighting wars and setting our own domestic policies, or even how we choose to vote. Any "dictats" on the Single Market are full of opt-outs and derogations anyway, and mainly regulate trading and FoM.

We are where we are, however, and I am relatively unaffected, even if a trifle peeved.
Click to expand...
I haven't misunderstood anything, if your domestic policies are at odds with EU legislation then you can't have them whilst being an eu member, you have to set them within their bounds ergo you are ruled by the EU as per my original statement.
People voted for and against being in the EU for a variety of reasons to varying degrees, immigration being one of them, and like any vote they don't have to justify them to anyone.

Some of you must be very peeved , oh dear :cry:, cos they can't resist bitching and whining about it in threads nothing to do with the EU, i.e. this one about tango man, it does bring me some joy I must admit.
 
Have you had any dialogue with the likes of Terry Christian on the matter pawras? :drink:
 
pawras said:
I haven't misunderstood anything, if your domestic policies are at odds with EU legislation then you can't have them whilst being an eu member, you have to set them within their bounds ergo you are ruled by the EU as per my original statement.
People voted for and against being in the EU for a variety of reasons to varying degrees, immigration being one of them, and like any vote they don't have to justify them to anyone.

Some of you must be very peeved , oh dear :cry:, cos they can't resist bitching and whining about it in threads nothing to do with the EU, i.e. this one about tango man, it does bring me some joy I must admit.
Click to expand...
The point is that “at odds” isn’t a thing. The EU regulates the SM, it does not dictate an overall policy - foreign or domestic. That is left purely for sovereign EU member states to carry out. That’s the bit you have misunderstood, and is why the EU could never intervene when the bedroom tax, or tuition fees were introduced.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Len Madeiros said:
The point is that “at odds” isn’t a thing. The regulates the SM, it does not dictate an overall policy - foreign or domestic. That is left purely for sovereign EU member states to carry out. That’s the bit you have misunderstood, and is why the EU could never intervene when the bedroom tax, or tuition fees were introduced.
Click to expand...
I haven't misunderstood anything , I never said it dictated on everything i.e. UK military, the eu doesn't dictate overall policy but it does dictate on areas covered by eu legislation where there are no vetoes or opt outs and are covered by qmv
 
pawras said:
I haven't misunderstood anything , I never said it dictated on everything i.e. UK military, the eu doesn't dictate overall policy but it does dictate on areas covered by eu legislation where there are no vetos or opt outs and are covered by qmv
Click to expand...
Ok, happy to park this discussion here.
 
barjon said:
I think it’s a fanciful piece, jj. Trumps’s modus operandi is to keep repeating a barefaced lie until people come to believe it and let him get his way and/or just bully people into submission. If he’s a Grand Master of anything in ain’t political chess.
Click to expand...
But the unseen advisors, political and military, know what they want and he will dance to whatever tune his advisers tell him to.

I would imagine that Trump with his 'put America first' mantra, would certainly align with a stance that opposes a threat to the interests of USA, such as any possible risk of a WW3 scenario, any more than Moscow does. In that resect, I can see the tactics behind the ambush. After all, none of us want to see MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) played out.

In that respect, the piece quoted above seems very plausible.

Having said that, I have never, in my lifetime seen an American president (or any leader of a country) actually lay hands on another premier. I'm sure that those Trumpites who love Trump's take on 'Mr Ordinary; just like you and me, doesn't go with the bullshit' will have loved his impersonation of a bullying, aggressive, disrespectful, loudmouth - after all, he does it so well.

I look at him and I see Lee Van Cleef in Shane: "Pick up the gun"
 
yorick said:
But the unseen advisors, political and military, know what they want and he will dance to whatever tune his advisers tell him to.

I would imagine that Trump with his 'put America first' mantra, would certainly align with a stance that opposes a threat to the interests of USA, such as any possible risk of a WW3 scenario, any more than Moscow does. In that resect, I can see the tactics behind the ambush. After all, none of us want to see MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) played out.

In that respect, the piece quoted above seems very plausible.

Having said that, I have never, in my lifetime seen an American president (or any leader of a country) actually lay hands on another premier. I'm sure that those Trumpites who love Trump's take on 'Mr Ordinary; just like you and me, doesn't go with the bullshit' will have loved his impersonation of a bullying, aggressive, disrespectful, loudmouth - after all, he does it so well.

I look at him and I see Lee Van Cleef in Shane: "Pick up the gun"
Click to expand...
Wasn't it Jack Palance?

I don't see the USA as is now putting boots on the ground let alone go to war with Russia over Ukraine, and europe are nothing but paper tigers without the USA.
Neither me or mine would go & fight for Ukraine. So the day starmer, blair or any armchair generals send thr own kids to fight for ukraine their views might hold some weight with me.
 

Attachments

  • IMG-20250303-WA0015.jpg
    IMG-20250303-WA0015.jpg
    73 KB · Views: 1
pawras said:
Wasn't it Jack Palance?

I don't see the USA as is now putting boots on the ground let alone go to war with Russia over Ukraine, and europe are nothing but paper tigers without the USA.
Neither me or mine would go & fight for Ukraine. So the day starmer, blair or any armchair generals send thr own kids to fight for ukraine their views might hold some weight with me.
Click to expand...
Yes, yes. Jack Palance. Thanks for that. (y)
 
And you do make me smile with your "Old Trots" and Quisling" jibes.

Blimey, no questioning which side of the political divide. Sounds like you're at war. Such certainty must be very comforting. Lucky man. :)
 
yorick said:
And you do make me smile with your "Old Trots" and Quisling" jibes.

Blimey, no questioning which side of the political divide. Sounds like you're at war. Such certainty must be very comforting. Lucky man. :)
Click to expand...
Others have no problem showing their diametrically opposing views so why should I when I have at least the same disdain for their world view as they have for mine.
 
Yeah, I know where you're coming from.

'Disdain' of one view for another and that's where we sit. Shame. There seems to be an assumption, on both sides, that they are enemies. Shame again.

The trouble I see is that if I offer any different view on the right wing sites I've visited, I'm tarred with the 'Looney Left', 'Commie' brush at the drop of a hat, or helmet would seem more appropriate. I believe that it's so important to listen to others and understand their point of view. We're at a time in our political climate where I slag you off and you slag me off. Shame once more.
 
Go on any lefty and/or pro eu thread on fkbk or where ever with right and/or pro brexit leaning views & lots of abuse is handed out.🤣

On some issues there can a level of compromise etc etc and come to a consenus reasonably acceptable to all but the extremes of each camp. But on others there can not as each side are such polar opposites one side has to win & the other lose. There is no point dancing around it they are enemies on these issues as they see what other sides wishes to impose on them as abhorrent and it's best they are on the other side of net not the bar
 
Last edited:
pawras said:
Go on any lefty and/or pro eu thread on fkbk or where ever with right and/or pro brexit leaning views & lots of abuse is handed out.🤣

On some issues there can a level of compromise etc etc and come to a consenus reasonably acceptable to all but the extremes of each camp. But on others there can not as each side are such polar opposites one side has to win & the other lose. There is no point dancing around it they are enemies on these issues as they see what other sides wishes to impose on them as abhorrent and it's best they are on the other side of net not the bar
Click to expand...
Again: 'Lefty': it's like a trope, it just goes on and on.

You're not conversing with someone who's slagging you off for your views but still the talk of 'Lefties'. why not just left - wingers?

I suspect this comment may be received with a 'meh' but I write it anyway.

Cheers.
 
yorick said:
Again: 'Lefty': it's like a trope, it just goes on and on.

You're not conversing with someone who's slagging you off for your views but still the talk of 'Lefties'. why not just left - wingers?

I suspect this comment may be received with a 'meh' but I write it anyway.

Cheers.
Click to expand...
force of habit, left winger then for the sake of civility, all means the same to me.
 
I have said this before, but it's worth saying again.

If you are in the centre left or just straight up somewhat boringly in the centre, the far right believe you are in the far left, by default of not being 'with them'.

Likewise, if you are in the centre right, or one of these small 'c' conservatives, many of whom actually voted remain during Brexit, you could actually be deemed part of the far right, or right wing, by the far left.

Again, 'if you are not with us, you are against us. One extreme fights the other, and rather than a strong center ground emerging, the centre just collapses.

The operative phrase is middle ground I suppose, but it's 2025, and there clearly is none left.

Politics as an art form rather than a reality, now there is something worth discussing and thinking about....
 
Last edited:
I agree to an extent

However, given by what I see in the msm and social media you are much more likely to be labelled "far right" just for not being left wing , and is bandied about a lot, being called far left in the msm is much less of a thing in my view. Social media is a total bear pit and won't change and isn't for the faint of hearted and has probably contributed to a reduction of the centre ground.

People's personal overton windows can be somewhat 'variable' lol
 
Last edited:
On a wider note, I sincerely hope (and yes) prey, Europe and Russia don't become Nuclear waste lands in the next few years.

Afterall, there'll be plenty of other places around the world to hide out and survive for world leaders.

It won't be like tracking Saddam Hussain to a sneaky hiding place a few feet underground in Baghdad.

Vlad has a lot of friends in Africa and elsewhere. He could set off World War Three in these parts and then disappear for good.
 
You'd have to be a total fkn stupid c to want war to happen.

But millennia of honed human nature and history means from individual to country levels you always have those who want to fk you over and you either let them or you don't

I don't believe in turning the other cheek cos you invariably just get that one smacked as well
 
Last edited:
Back
Top