Bring Back Boris?

[Streetwalker]

You might be able to argue that it was a lie as they believed it could be true but it was highly disingenuous not to mention that we had a veto on them joining

Yes we did have a veto but it didn't look like Cameron was even thinking about using it David Cameron: I still want Turkey to join EU, despite migrant fears (telegraph.co.uk)

He did say just before the referendum that it now looked highly unlikely they would join but  he had already done the damage to the remain campaign with his ongoing support right up to the weeks before the referendum when he realised it was getting a bit close for comfort 

David Cameron accused of risking national security by helping fund Turkey's EU bid (telegraph.co.uk)

As you point out Turkey had been a candidate since 1999, and in the 16.years between then and the referendum it had managed to "close" just one of the 30+ "chapters" it need to complete to move.on to the.nexg stage. Progress on the other chapters had stalled and even gone backwards.

Though the process was formally passed in 2019, it had defacto stopped well before 2016.

Had it completed the.forst stage, the next stage would have included a vote over which not only the UK would have had a veto, but crucially Greece and Cyprus. Thats not going to happen

There was and is no chance that Turkey would be joining the EU.  The entire accession process.waa a carrot to be dangled (somewhat unsuccessfully) to convince Turkey to not go down the authoritarian route and to be constructive in their handling of refugees. Politicians in the UK, France etc could curry favour with Turkey by talking up how much they supported Turkey, safe in the knowledge they always had the "oh I'm sorry, although I am 100% behind you my partner won't budge <shrugs apologeticly>" get out.

Even your post implies you don't really think turkey joining was.a.reaslistic possibility.

Of course we knew they wouldn't be joining   They were miles off 

[BeElBeeBub]

No they haven't ,Accession talks were suspended on 20th February 2019 .They had been a candidate country since 1999. In early 2016 the EU were attempting to accelerate Turkeys membership due to the migrant crisis so it was quite reasonable  to suggest they would be joining at that time

As you point out Turkey had been a candidate since 1999, and in the 16.years between then and the referendum it had managed to "close" just one of the 30+ "chapters" it need to complete to move.on to the.nexg stage. Progress on the other chapters had stalled and even gone backwards.

Though the process was formally passed in 2019, it had defacto stopped well before 2016.

Had it completed the.forst stage, the next stage would have included a vote over which not only the UK would have had a veto, but crucially Greece and Cyprus. Thats not going to happen 

There was and is no chance that Turkey would be joining the EU.  The entire accession process.waa a carrot to be dangled (somewhat unsuccessfully) to convince Turkey to not go down the authoritarian route and to be constructive in their handling of refugees. Politicians in the UK, France etc could curry favour with Turkey by talking up how much they supported Turkey, safe in the knowledge they always had the "oh I'm sorry, although I am 100% behind you my partner won't budge <shrugs apologeticly>" get out.

Even your post implies you don't really think turkey joining was.a.reaslistic possibility.

[Unlucky4Sum]

No they haven't ,Accession talks were suspended on 20th February 2019 .They had been a candidate country since 1999. In early 2016 the EU were attempting to accelerate Turkeys membership due to the migrant crisis so it was quite reasonable  to suggest they would be joining at that time

You might be able to argue that it was a lie as they believed it could be true but it was highly disingenuous not to mention that we had a veto on them joining

And to push this image through Facebook messaging to targeted swing voters in the last days using illegal funds was grossly dishonest:

[Streetwalker]

I should add, taking perfectly sensible proposals or things that might technically happen but require alot of unlikely things to happen and scaremongering around them was the MO of the Leave campaign.

Has turkey joined yet?




Official Leave Campaign Advert

No they haven't ,Accession talks were suspended on 20th February 2019 .They had been a candidate country since 1999. In early 2016 the EU were attempting to accelerate Turkeys membership due to the migrant crisis so it was quite reasonable  to suggest they would be joining at that time 

[BeElBeeBub]

It would be an EU army, and SOME OR ALL DECISIONS would be beyond the powers of member states.  The plan is to make it supranational, which means: "a type of international organization that is empowered to directly exercise some of the powers and functions otherwise reserved to states."  Therefore, once our lying politicians consent to it, Brussels would have executive powers.

This is exactly what I mean by misrepresenting things 

PESCOmisnorimarily about coordinating procurement and training between members so as to reduce duplication and to be more efficient.

The binding commitments.are about defense spending levels and committing to coordinate defence reviews. 

There is a project about "European battlegroups". These are small (1,500ish) self contained formations of troops for.deployment on humanitarian,.evacuation and stabilization missions.  Eg evacuating EU citizens from.Sudan or Kabul.  Crucially they are not under the control of the EU commission (as far as I know, none of the defence capabilities are). They are controlled by a dedicated.council *made up of member states foreign ministers*.

What Brexiters always failed (possibly deliberately) to.inderatwnd is that all the major decisions on EU direction come from councils made up of the member states.

The Comission is just the body charged with carrying out those decisions


A bit like a.large building managed by a residents council. The committee meets to decide what to do on shared matters (leaky roof, vermin in the basement, old lifts etc) but they don't actually carry out the work. Their decisions.are.given to a day to day management firm they appoint to implement the decisions.

[BeElBeeBub]

Cause they're all a bunch of cowards that don't like getting their hands dirty. They just leave it up to us and the Yanks.

Classic blinkered response.

Go on say it....."cheese eating surrender monkeys".

I seem to remember the German army had a pretty fearsome reputation once, requiring the.combined might if the British empire, the US and Soviet Union to crush it.

The Europeans have been somewhat reticent to get involved in the US's little adventures in the sand over the last two decades..... Whilst we followed along. I don't think we can call that a resounding success.

[Unlucky4Sum]

"Moreover, some scholars have argued that the Commission's ambition in recent years has been to seek "to shift the focus of European security and defense policy from a policy field dominated by member states to a supranational one" (Kaim and Kempin Citation2022, 5; see also Riddervold Citation2016; Riddervold and Trondal Citation2020; Håkansson Citation2021).

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14702436.2023.2213647?af=R

Look there's no doubt that a few EU politicians wanted a superstate with ownership of all the military resources of the EU nations and other similar powers.  For people like Juncker it was the only way that they'd ever have real power.

But the rest of the EU doesn't want such and have multiple times effectively told them to F@@@ right off.  Moreover at the time of our referendum we had the 2011 Act that made it mandatory on the UK to veto any such measures unless a specific to measure referendum gave the government of the day permission.

But that truth didn't suit Vote Leave or their more gobby followers who needed to portray the false spectre of government from Brussels to scare 17 million into voting to leave.  Whether you were one of the conners or the conned I know not.

[Unlucky4Sum]

This is what I see.

I will have PMd you to explain why you are seeing an illusion.

[Scott777]

The leave side took this sensible idea, and scaremongered it as "a euro army". Implying some sort of force the UK would ha e no say in. British soldiers being forced to fight in wars that the UK had no say in.

It would be an EU army, and SOME OR ALL DECISIONS would be beyond the powers of member states.  The plan is to make it supranational, which means: "a type of international organization that is empowered to directly exercise some of the powers and functions otherwise reserved to states."  Therefore, once our lying politicians consent to it, Brussels would have executive powers.

[Paul]

No Nick you are pushing a false view of what post 115 is and trying to run away from the commitment you gave there.

I've offered to explain by PM why you have an incorrect view of what post 115 is, if you want to be stubborn and ignore help then so be it.

See if you can find any poster to back your pretence that post 115 was by me

This is what I see. 

[Nick]

It could be next door to NATO headquarters!

Seriously, can you explain why closer cooperation with our EU neighbours is a bad thing, when we are *already* commited to closely integrating with and even defending them as NATO members.

Cause they're all a bunch of cowards that don't like getting their hands dirty. They just leave it up to us and the Yanks. 

[BeElBeeBub]

I should add, taking perfectly sensible proposals or things that might technically happen but require alot of unlikely things to happen and scaremongering around them was the MO of the Leave campaign.

Has turkey joined yet?




Official Leave Campaign Advert 

[BeElBeeBub]

If you want to discuss the pros and cons of military integration, you first have to admit that is the plan, instead of constant denial.

Closer integration is no secret.

We've.been at it for years.

Supecat Jaguar, Tornado, *Eurofighter*, joint exercises, joint deployments, officer secondments etc.

The "in the news".Storm Shadow is a joint euro project. 

As is the world beating Meteor missile.

We already standardise equipment and procedures as NATO members.

The aim was to tighten and formalise the links between European members so we were able to provide a credible force in the.absence of the US.

The leave side took this sensible idea, and scaremongered it as "a euro army". Implying some sort of force the UK would ha e no say in. British soldiers being forced to fight in wars that the UK had no say in.

Yet they also turned a blind eye to the fact our NATO membership created greater obligations and less autonomy than the proposed PESCO.

[Scott777]

Go on then see if you can post a link of any quality to back that that was the plan (and of course according to you is already in existence)

"Moreover, some scholars have argued that the Commission's ambition in recent years has been to seek "to shift the focus of European security and defense policy from a policy field dominated by member states to a supranational one" (Kaim and Kempin Citation2022, 5; see also Riddervold Citation2016; Riddervold and Trondal Citation2020; Håkansson Citation2021).

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14702436.2023.2213647?af=R

[Scott777]

Not an Army is it, not even close to the central control of EU nations military as was described by your chums in the referendum campaign.

Maybe you don't know that we had joint military activities with European nations before we even joined the then EEC in 1972 and still will have long after we left. 

Denying the plan of full integration is ignorant.  The only reason it is not complete is because of Brexit and reduced funding.  "First, the funding for Military Mobility infrastructure projects has been greatly reduced, from the €6.5 billion proposal to €1.69 (in 2018 prices) following the negotiations on the 2021–2027 EU budget (European Council Citation2020)."

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14702436.2023.2213647?af=R