EU. In or out?

[-Ralph-]

One of the minor reasons for some people voting out was the possibility of an EU army.

Bit like voting out because of the possibility of an alien invasion and just reinforces my view that most people didn't have a clue what they were voting for. There's no way in hell all 28 countries, including the UK, were ever going to agree to it.

[Dutchgit]

One of the minor reasons for some people voting out was the possibility of an EU army. My understanding was that this was first muted because the good ol US of A wouldn't let some of the new member states join NATO. With the very real prospect of Trump becoming the next president I think I would rather we were in an EU army than Nato.
Cheers Jak

And moving on, the eu is ruled by Germany, so the eu army would be a German army, call me old fashioned but I for one am not keen on that idea.

Some people would be better of, on an island, cut off from the rest of the world. :sick:

[rlkat]

One of the minor reasons for some people voting out was the possibility of an EU army. My understanding was that this was first muted because the good ol US of A wouldn't let some of the new member states join NATO. With the very real prospect of Trump becoming the next president I think I would rather we were in an EU army than Nato.
Cheers Jak

And moving on, the eu is ruled by Germany, so the eu army would be a German army, call me old fashioned but I for one am not keen on that idea.

Some people would be better of, on an island, cut off from the rest of the world. :sick:

I nominate Merkel for that. (thumbs)

[-Ralph-]

One of the minor reasons for some people voting out was the possibility of an EU army. My understanding was that this was first muted because the good ol US of A wouldn't let some of the new member states join NATO. With the very real prospect of Trump becoming the next president I think I would rather we were in an EU army than Nato.
Cheers Jak

And moving on, the eu is ruled by Germany, so the eu army would be a German army, call me old fashioned but I for one am not keen on that idea.

Some people would be better of, on an island, cut off from the rest of the world. :sick:

I rest my case that people voted on the basis of absolute nonsense!

[catcitrus]

If we had gone down Camaloon's route (and he has now completely bailed to the Blair lecture circuit) we would have been still very much on the fringes and would continue to be told to "go away and be quiet--look what we've done for you"---I think that with a strong sense of national pride we had very little choice in the end, and as the "what does Brexit really mean" debate rumbles on the European Union has had a wake up call and is perhaps grinding to disarray or a much looser Union--either way we are better off to play a considered waiting game until the dust settles. It also looks as though things haven't really changed that much in the UK--so far-- now that the politicians have got sore throats shouting at each other--keep calm, and carry on.

[Scott_rider]

...ahem, today 14/09 I read this... :whistle:

Juncker proposes EU military headquarters. The European Union needs a military headquarters to work towards a common military force, the Commission president has told MEPs in Strasbourg.

I'm glad we voted 'OUT'.

[Cone]

Agreed if you look at the current EU quick reaction force I believe most of the contingent is British anyway. Would want to be part of that joke.

[-Ralph-]

...ahem, today 14/09 I read this... :whistle:

Juncker proposes EU military headquarters. The European Union needs a military headquarters to work towards a common military force, the Commission president has told MEPs in Strasbourg.

I'm glad we voted 'OUT'.

Well there's some spin if ever I saw it. Pick out a few lines and present them as your case. Why don't you post the whole article for everyone to read?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37359196

"The Brexit vote has given added impetus to plans for greater defence co-operation, because the UK has always objected to the potential conflict of interest with Nato."

It's because we voted Out that it's now back on the table, becasue while we were in the EU it was never going to happen.

Probably still won't happen because there's 750 ish MEP's that will have to vote on it and 28 countries that have to agree to it.

Juncker runs the European Commission, which only table proposals for consideration.

More proof of people voting Out when they didn't understand how the EU works and just believed the hype.

Well done, we've separated ourselves, and now we COULD (but extremely unlikely) end up with a massive military power right on our doorstep that we aren't a part of. Not that I think they would ever invade us, but never say never, does make you feel safe? (Especially those of you who think it'll be a German army LOL!)

[-Ralph-]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37317765

[Scott_rider]

^...ahem, there is no need to be so sanctimonious :whistle:. It's a forum not a university lecture therefore in my opinion quick fire comments are more appropriate.

As for the comment about the conflict with Nato then that is valid but it was only the view of the UK and not the other EU countries who broadly speaking have wanted one:

This has long been the ambition of the most ardent eurocrats. Back in March 2015, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker declared that a common European Army was needed to address the problem that the EU, as an international player, was not "taken entirely seriously" in the world - not least in Moscow.

I'm glad we voted 'OUT' (thumbs) .