How will CH cope with Brexit?

Anything that doesn't fit anywhere else, but that's still CH related.

Moderator: Moderators

rockfreak
Grecian
Posts: 972
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 8:31 pm
Real Name: David Redshaw
Location: Saltdean, East Sussex

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by rockfreak »

If Wesley Clark is not to your personal liking then who is? Let's have a "name your favourite general" competition. By the way, another big American name at the time was Alan Greenspan, head of the Federal Reserve at the time of Bush Jr. There's that news clip where Greenspan had just finished talking to a clutch of journalists about the Iraq invasion and thought that the cameras and mics were switched off and laughingly asided to the media pack: "What do you think this is about if not oil?"
loringa
Deputy Grecian
Posts: 473
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 5:01 pm
Real Name: Andrew Loring
Location: South Gloucestershire

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by loringa »

rockfreak wrote: Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:02 pm If Wesley Clark is not to your personal liking then who is? Let's have a "name your favourite general" competition.
Well, since you ask. My favourite general of all time would be Field Marshal Bill Slim: excellent both strategically and tactically, compassionate and masses of emotional intelligence - a truly great leader (but one whom I suspect most folk interested in the Military and military history would place near or at the top of their list).

Since we are really talking United States generals of recent time, I think Colin Powell and Norman Schwartzkopf jointly take the top spot. The former could probably have won the Republican presidential nomination if his wife hadn't threatened to leave him if he went into politics. No general since Eisenhower did a better job working with disparate allies than Schwartzkopf. We celebrate Kuwait Liberation Day tomorrow and his skill in working with Prince Khaled to bring the West and the Arab nations together was quite brilliant, quite apart from his outstanding fighting qualities.

More recently, Stanley McChrystal was most impressive if a little austere - nothing at all like he was portrayed by Brad Pitt in The War Machine. Similarly David Petraeus - another truly great leader and strategist, pity he couldn't keep it in his trousers! I think Jim Mattis earns vast amounts of kudos for suffering Trump for so long and serving his nation so loyally. H R McMaster - huge brain, loyal servant of the US, again putting up with Trump for the greater good - and younger than I am!!

From a purely personal perspective I would single out Paul D Eaton, that rare thing a US Army general and a Democrat. Did everything he could to rebuild the Iraqi Armed Forces following a western model but expediency and pressure from on high meant he ultimately failed.

So, that's my list. What about yours, or are all generals warmongering child-killers who cajole politicians into conflicts so they can see their men die (and win medals)? Oh, I forget, General Zhukov - he certainly got the job done and what's a few million Russians, he had loads of them?
User avatar
marty
Grecian
Posts: 835
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 1:29 pm
Real Name: Marty E
Location: Buckinghamshire

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by marty »

rockfreak wrote: Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:02 pm Let's have a "name your favourite general" competition.
Definitely this chap.
Image
My therapist says I have a preoccupation with vengeance. We’ll see about that.
MrEd
GE (Great Erasmus)
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:29 pm
Real Name: Ed McFarlane

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by MrEd »

Seeing that CH coped with Mary Tudor and her terror, the Luftwaffe (I was told that the Water Tower was a boon to their navigation, so perhaps it was best left alone) and the Lorry Drivers' strike of the Winter of Discontent - that by extending half-term a few days - I don't see how 'Brexit', or the restoring of the constitutional independence of the UK to how it was before 17th October 1972, can affect CH in any meaningful way. What might matter is policy after independence, but given that the UK would be able to set its own parameters for work permits and immigration, there is no reason to fear a shortage of language teachers and none of my CH language teachers were native speakers of what they taught, one was born in China but didn't teach Chinese.
michael scuffil
Button Grecian
Posts: 1612
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 12:53 pm
Real Name: michael scuffil
Location: germany

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by michael scuffil »

MrEd wrote: Wed Feb 27, 2019 6:27 pm 'Brexit', or the restoring of the constitutional independence of the UK to how it was before 17th October 1972,
Ah yes, before 17th October 1972. When there were no home computers, when there was no internet, when a phone call to Germany (from the UK) had to be booked an hour in advance and cost a day's salary, when there was no just-in-time economy, when the EEC had six members, when the Cold War was at its height, when China was an economic midget, and when the UK didn't have a land border with an EEC country. (And incidentally, as Harold Wilson put it, when the country was in hock up to its neck to the USA.) The world has changed. You can't 'restore' ANYTHING to before 17th October 1972 (and Britain never lost its constitutional independence, as it has proved by seceding from the EU).
Th.B. 27 1955-63
MrEd
GE (Great Erasmus)
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:29 pm
Real Name: Ed McFarlane

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by MrEd »

michael scuffil wrote: Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:24 pm
MrEd wrote: Wed Feb 27, 2019 6:27 pm 'Brexit', or the restoring of the constitutional independence of the UK to how it was before 17th October 1972,
Ah yes, before 17th October 1972. When there were no home computers, when there was no internet, when a phone call to Germany (from the UK) had to be booked an hour in advance and cost a day's salary, when there was no just-in-time economy, when the EEC had six members, when the Cold War was at its height, when China was an economic midget, and when the UK didn't have a land border with an EEC country. (And incidentally, as Harold Wilson put it, when the country was in hock up to its neck to the USA.) The world has changed. You can't 'restore' ANYTHING to before 17th October 1972 (and Britain never lost its constitutional independence, as it has proved by seceding from the EU).
What an excellent demonstration of a failure to argue from reason. You cite some historical context, as if it were determinative of an argument for the present day, and even then don't get your facts right It's abundantly clear that you are ignorant of the origins of the internet, which took form in the late 1960s, and so what if a phone call to Germany was difficult? The Post Office was state-owned and had virtually a monopoly on telecomms. The country was in hock to the USA because it had bankrupted itself dealing with a previous European Economic Community founded in 1942 in Berlin and its generator. The fact that the world has changed is just the context.

If Australia, Barbados and Canada can be independent, then so can the UK. Whether it should be independent is another question, depending on one's preference.

And sneering is no substitute for argument. But I suppose it suits when you don't have an argument to make.
Otter
GE (Great Erasmus)
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 5:17 pm
Real Name: Stephen O'Rourke
Location: East Anglia

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by Otter »

The UK is independent. Are you seriously suggesting that France, Germany etc. are not independent countries? If so, there's no point debating with you as it is as worthwhile as arguing with a flat-earther.

Talking of "not having an argument to make", I'm yet to hear a single good argument in favour of Brexit.
sejintenej
Button Grecian
Posts: 4092
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:19 pm
Real Name: David Brown ColA '52-'61
Location: Essex

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by sejintenej »

Otter wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:28 pm The UK is independent. Are you seriously suggesting that France, Germany etc. are not independent countries? If so, there's no point debating with you as it is as worthwhile as arguing with a flat-earther.

Talking of "not having an argument to make", I'm yet to hear a single good argument in favour of Brexit.
Depends on your definition of independent. Who ordered that Britain cut the working week to 32 hours? Who orderd that Britain accept a high number of refugees of questionable provenence? Who ordered that Britain ban the red cross and use a white cross on green? Who ordered Britain to take a lot of useful farm land out of use and import French produce? Who ordered that many British places fly the EU flag over or instead of the UK flag? Who is trying to order Britain to have an open and unregulated border with the EU? I could go on and on; das reich has made Britain a vassal. Hilter might be dead but Frau ..........
What happens if a politician drowns in a river? That is pollution.
What happens if all of them drown? That is solution!!!
Otter
GE (Great Erasmus)
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 5:17 pm
Real Name: Stephen O'Rourke
Location: East Anglia

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by Otter »

sejintenej wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:40 pm
Otter wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:28 pm The UK is independent. Are you seriously suggesting that France, Germany etc. are not independent countries? If so, there's no point debating with you as it is as worthwhile as arguing with a flat-earther.

Talking of "not having an argument to make", I'm yet to hear a single good argument in favour of Brexit.
Depends on your definition of independent. Who ordered that Britain cut the working week to 32 hours? Who orderd that Britain accept a high number of refugees of questionable provenence? Who ordered that Britain ban the red cross and use a white cross on green? Who ordered Britain to take a lot of useful farm land out of use and import French produce? Who ordered that many British places fly the EU flag over or instead of the UK flag? Who is trying to order Britain to have an open and unregulated border with the EU? I could go on and on; das reich has made Britain a vassal. Hilter might be dead but Frau ..........
Britain partly ordered this, by having a (very large, by virtue of its population) seat at the European Parliament, and a veto at the European Council.

The use of the Red Cross symbol is restricted by an international convention that has absolutely nothing to do with the EU. Whether or not an EU flag is on a particular building does not affect anyone for better or worse. Both of these issues are rather minor.

I'm not clued up on working hours restrictions, but I am an employee and work 40 hours, as do millions of others, and many work more. So whatever rule you're referring to is not mandatory.

Britain constantly takes in fewer refugees (as a proportion of total population) than most other European countries. Considering it imposed itself over so much of the world, this is rather hypocritical.

Britain has always had an opt out of Schengen and the EU has never tried to force it or Ireland to join it. Having lived on the continent, the ability to travel freely and with open borders across almost an entire continent is absolutely wonderful and the epitome of freedom.

Comparisons to Nazism are dubious in most arguments, but even more so when the vast majority of EU countries have lived under Nazism or another actual dictatorship in the 20th century, several as recently as 1990. Donald Tusk put it much more eloquently than I could, but the essence is that to most of Europe - even eurosceptic people on the continent - labelling the EU as a dictatorship or akin to the Third Reich is totally incomprehensible and inappropriate.

I don't know much about farming, but I do know that thanks to the EU, we have among the highest food and environmental standards and on the planet. Now farmers, both leave and remain, are horrified at the prospect of a deal with the US and its abhorrent animal welfare and food hygiene practices.
sejintenej
Button Grecian
Posts: 4092
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:19 pm
Real Name: David Brown ColA '52-'61
Location: Essex

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by sejintenej »

Otter wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:49 pm
sejintenej wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2019 6:40 pm
Otter wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:28 pm The UK is independent. Are you seriously suggesting that France, Germany etc. are not independent countries? If so, there's no point debating with you as it is as worthwhile as arguing with a flat-earther.

Talking of "not having an argument to make", I'm yet to hear a single good argument in favour of Brexit.
Depends on your definition of independent. Who ordered that Britain cut the working week to 32 hours? Who orderd that Britain accept a high number of refugees of questionable provenence? Who ordered that Britain ban the red cross and use a white cross on green? Who ordered Britain to take a lot of useful farm land out of use and import French produce? Who ordered that many British places fly the EU flag over or instead of the UK flag? Who is trying to order Britain to have an open and unregulated border with the EU? I could go on and on; das reich has made Britain a vassal. Hilter might be dead but Frau ..........
Britain partly ordered this, by having a (very large, by virtue of its population) seat at the European Parliament, and a veto at the European Council.
and we got the meaningless Commissioners jobs where we had no power against the Socialists.
The use of the Red Cross symbol is restricted by an international convention that has absolutely nothing to do with the EU.

You might be too young to remember when all first aid boxes etc were denoted by a red cross on a white backgroundWhy the blazes were we forced to repaint everything?
Whether or not an EU flag is on a particular building does not affect anyone for better or worse. Both of these issues are rather minor
OK but if the building does not fly the EU flag there is a heavy fine imposed by Brussels.
I'm not clued up on working hours restrictions, but I am an employee and work 40 hours, as do millions of others, and many work more. So . whatever rule you're referring to is not mandatory.
The rule is 32 hours but Britain kept the option that employees can choose to work longer hours - employers made that the fact.
Britain constantly takes in fewer refugees (as a proportion of total population) than most other European countries. Considering it imposed itself over so much of the world, this is rather hypocritical.
Your latter point is the subject of another thread which indicates that many such countries regret the fact that Britain left.
Britain has always had an opt out of Schengen and the EU has never tried to force it or Ireland to join it. Having lived on the continent, the ability to travel freely and with open borders across almost an entire continent is absolutely wonderful and the epitome of freedom.
It has nothing to do with Schengen. Just in case you haven't been reading the papers the EU is trying to force Britain to keep its border with the EU open and totally uncontrolled so the EU can move people (including all their criminals and unwanted S**** etc.) and goods into Britain unchecked.. As my family well know the border was certainly very porous even when it was supposed to be controlled
Comparisons to Nazism are dubious in most arguments, but even more so when the vast majority of EU countries have lived under Nazism or another actual dictatorship in the 20th century, several as recently as 1990. Donald Tusk put it much more eloquently than I could, but the essence is that to most of Europe - even eurosceptic people on the continent - labelling the EU as a dictatorship or akin to the Third Reich is totally incomprehensible and inappropriate.
Tusk is a politician with an understandable bias - just talk to the people on the Prague streets as I did Perhaps but several countries are watching Britain so that they also can leave.the EU can move people and goods into Britain unchecked.
I don't know much about farming, but I do know that thanks to the EU, we have among the highest food and environmental standards and on the planet. Now farmers are horrified at the prospect of a deal with the US and its abhorrent animal welfare and food hygiene practices.
Have you never heard about the kinky banana? It must not be sold if its curve is more than a stated amount. Go to Portugal and you will see lorge bags of lemons for euro beside the road; it is illegal to sell them because they are not of standard size; there is no safety problem - some Brussels bureaucrat has bug^^^ed the growers up because he can do so.. Over and above any health issues the biggest destruction of fruit and vegetables in the EU is because of size and shape. I heard that only about 8% meet the top EU standard and about 40% cannot be sold legally. Oh, by the way, my next door neighbour was given the seed and paid 800 euros cash per hectare to SOW maize. there was no requirement to raise it, fertilise it and harvest it .
USA: how does what they do affect us IF we say no to them?

To take this a stage further, for about 16 years I have been ill; why does it need some Brussels bureaucrat (whose wages are by law untaxed) have to approve the blood pressure meter my wife uses and the inhalers and meters I use daily and impress a CE stamp on them. Getting that approval costs a lot of money - a tax on victims. We have actually lost a large number of old established and safe fertilizers, pest control items, etc etc simply because Brussels demands so much money thayt it would cost the manufacturers to sell them. In a month or two we will lose the last weed suppresor - the countrside will be overrun.'

Because we have been so overrun by Brussels orders that we forget what true freedom is. OK so Labour , and tony bl**r allowed them to do it to ouyr loss - we joined a Common MARKET of goods and services, not a mini USA before they put us in the bovine excrement
What happens if a politician drowns in a river? That is pollution.
What happens if all of them drown? That is solution!!!
User avatar
J.R.
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15835
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 4:53 pm
Real Name: John Rutley
Location: Dorking, Surrey

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by J.R. »

I'll cope with Brexit in my own way.
John Rutley. Prep B & Coleridge B. 1958-1963.
User avatar
marty
Grecian
Posts: 835
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 1:29 pm
Real Name: Marty E
Location: Buckinghamshire

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by marty »

Otter wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:49 pm
Britain partly ordered this, by having a (very large, by virtue of its population) seat at the European Parliament, and a veto at the European Council.

Britain constantly takes in fewer refugees (as a proportion of total population) than most other European countries. Considering it imposed itself over so much of the world, this is rather hypocritical.
I don't disagree with the rest of your post Otter but why should the number of refugees we take in be linked to the existing population size? That doesn't account for the amount of space we have (which compared to most European countries is far less). The UK is the 7th most densely populated country in Europe. Surely space needs to be a consideration as well? France is twice the size of the UK but we have similar population sizes. Should we take the same number of refugees as France even though we have much less space?

https://www.indexmundi.com/map/?v=21000&r=eu&l=en
My therapist says I have a preoccupation with vengeance. We’ll see about that.
Otter
GE (Great Erasmus)
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 5:17 pm
Real Name: Stephen O'Rourke
Location: East Anglia

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by Otter »

marty wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:25 am
Otter wrote: Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:49 pm
Britain partly ordered this, by having a (very large, by virtue of its population) seat at the European Parliament, and a veto at the European Council.

Britain constantly takes in fewer refugees (as a proportion of total population) than most other European countries. Considering it imposed itself over so much of the world, this is rather hypocritical.
I don't disagree with the rest of your post Otter but why should the number of refugees we take in be linked to the existing population size? That doesn't account for the amount of space we have (which compared to most European countries is far less). The UK is the 7th most densely populated country in Europe. Surely space needs to be a consideration as well? France is twice the size of the UK but we have similar population sizes. Should we take the same number of refugees as France even though we have much less space?

https://www.indexmundi.com/map/?v=21000&r=eu&l=en
I agree Marty, population shouldn’t be the only factor. I should/could have expanded on this but my main point was that the UK is very stingy and reticent with regard to accepting people in need, compared to most of our neighbours. The government’s proud “hostile atmosphere” and all that.

My mother’s family were Jews who fled Germany in the 1930s, and were warmly welcomed here. They’d be disgusted at the attitude to foreigners in general now, especially among older people.
sejintenej
Button Grecian
Posts: 4092
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 12:19 pm
Real Name: David Brown ColA '52-'61
Location: Essex

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by sejintenej »

marty wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:25 am
I don't disagree with the rest of your post Otter but why should the number of refugees we take in be linked to the existing population size? That doesn't account for the amount of space we have (which compared to most European countries is far less). The UK is the 7th most densely populated country in Europe. Surely space needs to be a consideration as well? France is twice the size of the UK but we have similar population sizes. Should we take the same number of refugees as France even though we have much less space?

https://www.indexmundi.com/map/?v=21000&r=eu&l=en
Marty; I suggest that the statistics to which you refer are misleading.
The densities are based on square kilometers with no consideration for hability. The UK includes the Cornish moors, Exmoor, Dartmoor, half of Wales, the Peak District, the Yorkshire Moors, the Lake District, the Highlands and islands etc etc.which make up a substantial percentage of the UK land mass. France by comparison has the Massif Central, the Alps and Pyrenees of which the first and last do have substantial areas which are inhabited. The percentage loss in france is a far smaller percentage than in the UK. The ratio of UK 266 to France 104 would be infinitely greater if hability were calculated.
What happens if a politician drowns in a river? That is pollution.
What happens if all of them drown? That is solution!!!
User avatar
marty
Grecian
Posts: 835
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 1:29 pm
Real Name: Marty E
Location: Buckinghamshire

Re: How will CH cope with Brexit?

Post by marty »

Ok but I'm now a bit confused. What you're saying is that large or 'substantial' parts of the UK are national parks (and therefore largely uninhabitable). Surely this reduces the amount of space available for people to live in even further?

Comparisons to France aside and adjusting for "percentage loss" (which looks to be rather difficult to determine) the UK is still in the top third of the list in terms of population density.
My therapist says I have a preoccupation with vengeance. We’ll see about that.
Post Reply