UK General Discussion:The Rt. Hon Alex Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Populist Hero

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Being a single zebra, even a strong one, is always less strong than being in the herd. The members of the EU each agreed to give up some of their sovereignty in exchange for a stronger position in the world. That was their sovereign choice: to defer to, & be bound by, the EU.

Not to mention, all countries in the EU still have the power to refuse to follow EU directives anyway, precisely because they are indeed still sovereign countries. Of course, such countries would potentially face consequences if they were to do so, as the EU is still a club with rules, after all, but for such countries, it's a simple matter of deciding whether the potential consequences are worth taking the action: that is also their sovereign choice.

So take your uninformed opinions about sovereignty & shove it.

The US has been a far better ally to the UK than the EU ever has so UK will benefit from a trade deal with the US.

While I can understand why the UK would want and benefit from a trade deal with the US, why would the US want to give the UK a better deal than It would/has the EU?  All-in-all, the UK's main trade advantage with the US was as an English -speaking, common-law stepping stone to the EU. Thanks to Brexit, Ireland fulfills that role now. Dublin is more important to us than London.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Oh my God you're also one of these f**king people. Good grief. One minute you're posting well-researched effortposts and the next you're back with the bottom-of-the-barrel dumbass cold takes.

Westphalian sovereignty isn't controversial outside of far-left groups and the boards of multinational corporations. But politics makes strange bedfellows, I suppose.

The principle of Westphalian sovereignty (the very concept of which originated within an international agreement) can & has been tempered by international agreements, which in & of themselves help to comprise international law! The fact that the UK was able to voluntarily withdraw from the EU treaties is, in & of itself, proof that your argument over 'sovereignty' is, was, & always will be complete & utter nonsense.

Oh please, the EU is not just another international institution. Does NAFTA have a president? Can its courts override the US constitution? Where is the army of ASEAN?

The EU stopped being a representative institution when it rammed the Lisbon treaty through. Macron and Merkel are discussing an EU army. I'm glad the UK got out while it still could. The rest of the member nations need to start feeling the slow boil of the pot they're in, or they'll be forever trapped as vassal states to Germany and France.

You keep forgetting that each member state is a sovereign country that voluntarily chose to voluntarily exercise their sovereignty so as to voluntarily cede certain competences to the EU in its treaties & which, at any time they so choose, can voluntarily stop doing so by once again voluntarily exercising their sovereignty so as to voluntarily withdraw.

Here's hoping you don't forget that it was all voluntary.

Farage's farewell speech. I hope the EU takes his words to heart. The Union is a disingenuous violation of national sovereignty and it needs to be destroyed.

Being a single zebra, even a strong one, is always less strong than being in the herd. The members of the EU each agreed to give up some of their sovereignty in exchange for a stronger position in the world. That was their sovereign choice: to defer to, & be bound by, the EU.

Not to mention, all countries in the EU still have the power to refuse to follow EU directives anyway, precisely because they are indeed still sovereign countries. Of course, such countries would potentially face consequences if they were to do so, as the EU is still a club with rules, after all, but for such countries, it's a simple matter of deciding whether the potential consequences are worth taking the action: that is also their sovereign choice.

So take your uninformed opinions about sovereignty & shove it.

The US has been a far better ally to the UK than the EU ever has so UK will benefit from a trade deal with the US.


Also Europe adopting US style nationalism(not the Trump style, the pre Trump style more like)>>> the EU easily

We've had this discussion before. I'm not having it again, except to say that if you think that Brexit will benefit the British economy, then good luck to you (or, rather, the British people). And even more luck to them if you think that there will ever be a trade deal with the US that benefits the UK in any greater way, shape, or size than the EU ever did. Trump will try to screw the UK over so much that the EU will have seemed like a blessing (which it really was).

It's not so much that Trump will try to screw the UK as that there's no real reason for the US to give the UK a better trade deal than it had as part of the EU. Indeed, now that the UK is out of the EU, it's less attractive as a trade partner as it no longer serves as a gateway to Europe for US gods and services. Plus, there's no way a trade deal gets done before 2021 even with the best of intentions on all sides. Moreover, if Trump loses in November, trade talks will likely have to start over from scratch. The absolute best the UK could hope for this year would be a temporary deal that keeps the US UK trade relationship much the same as it was before Brexit until real negotiations can take place after our election.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

^ Trump hates the EU. Literally. He openly admits that to him, we are worse than China. He regards Europe in general, and Merkel and Macron in particular, as on par with, if not *the*  US' number one geopolitical enemy. He will give the UK a trade deal because everything that weakens Europe and poaches a country from the EUs sphere of Influence is a win for the Trump doctrine. Little economic logic behind it.
Both Johnson and Trump have an interest in weakening the EU position during UK-EU talks, and will use a prospective US-UK trade deal, and the now imminent Trade war with the EU (after the Ceasefire with China) to do so. You'll see how fast such a deal can be done, if the political will is really there (just look at the US-Israel FTA).

Which is why the Outcome of the US presidential election is going to be so massively important for the Balance of Power in the UK-EU trade talks (and at such a crucial time too, right before the deadline to reach a deal). If Trump is reelected, the UKs position will be much stronger, if  a democrat is, then the UK will find themselves very much out in the cold and hardly in a position not to bend to most of the EUs demands.

I said election, not presidential election. Congress is unlikely to approve any trade deal this year. Even if one gets negotiated this year, it'll be punted until after the election by Congress. Maybe one that simply gives the UK what it had as part of the EU before Brexit could pass Congress this year, provided it's written to be a temporary stopgap to prevent trade disruption, but nothing new will get passed by Congress in an election year.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The only good thing about BoJo dying would be it might get Trumbo to take this situation seriously, but that's too much of a long shot.